Why anyone at Edwize would think that a democratically elected, sitting representative from the House of Commons should have been included in a discussion of their own future remains a source of great mystery to Sir Andrew. Who can better lay out a vision of the future for the common teacher unionist than the best minds of venture philanthropy, trained at Eton and Oxbridge? And is it not true that the House of Lords even has a peer or two who once sat in the House of Commons, before they demonstrated the refinement and cultivation that merited elevation into a higher class, among the nobility? Don’t they say everything that could be possibly said on behalf of the commoner? [After all, how much is there to be said?]

The speech of the High Lord Sheriff of Labor Relations from New York was a model of decorum and fair-minded balance, according to the report of our edu-lord. His presentation was free from those crude and vulgar disputations that mark ‘question period’ in the House of Commons, and this allowed the assembled to fully assimilate its fine points of nuance without fear of disruption [or disagreement].

Enough with this myth of democratic voice – allow vulgar, unwashed commoners to speak for themselves, and the entire natural order of things will be overturned. Before too soon there will be calls for a republican form of government!

2 Comments:

“Before too soon there will be calls for a republican form of government!”

Or worse, there may be demands that high school teachers actually get to elect their own vice-president. Or horror of horrors, voices that oppose miserable contracts favored by the likes of the New York Post might get free access to UFT mailboxes.

“Enough with this myth of democratic voice…”

It’s refreshing to see the voice of Unity telling the truth, even if he doesn’t realize it.

this is, I believe, the fourth post on EdWize devoted to this panel. I have reached the point where I don’t really understand what is being written, nor am I all that motivated to try.

So I understood the first issue from the first post: They want to talk about the future of teacher’s unions without the unions present? Fine. They are idiots. Let them run their teacher-free discussion.

It’s up to us on the other hand to change the future of teacher’s unions. In doing so, it makes sense to pay attention to what influential (center-right?) pundits say. But is this one guy all that important? You’ve made our point, and quite sharply. Time to move on?

Jonathan

Don’t miss

Real stories from the classrooms of new NYC public school teachers. Take a look.